this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
120 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

23 readers
2 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

founded 1 year ago
 

And more states may be on the list soon.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DeiLayborer@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

One thing to note is that these laws (or at least Louisiana's and Virginia's) don't criminalize anything. Instead, they create a private cause of action (meaning that someone can bring a civil lawsuit) for damages that result from underage exposure to pornography or whatever. If I had to guess, it's an attempt to get around any possible First Amendment challenges by a porn site, just as Texas' anti-abortion cause of action laws were intended to get around Roe before it was overturned.

I'm going to be very curious to see how this plays out assuming anyone ever actually sues. It's not clear to me what actual damages could actually be proven, and at the least doing so would be difficult and expensive. Plus, in most states AFAIK, the plaintiff has a responsibility prior to suing to mitigate damages, and failure to do that can hurt a plaintiff's claim (the specifics are going to be entirely situation- and state-specific). It would also be pretty easy, I'd think, for the site to argue some variation of contributory negligence or comparative fault (depending on what the state in question calls it) to at least reduce any award if not eliminate it outright. Come to think of it, this might actually require the site to sue the parent(s) directly, since at least initially, the parents would presumably be suing on behalf of their kid rather than on their own. (This is starting to sound like a bar exam question.)

Finally, even assuming someone wins such a lawsuit, actually collecting is much more difficult when you're dealing with a non-US defendant. It can certainly be done (depending on the country in which they are based), but that too becomes extremely difficult, time-consuming, and expensive.

I'm sure there are parents out there who'd be willing to do this, but I doubt there're that many. Most sites, at least for now, are probably willing to roll the dice on that.